Welcome to HVAC-Talk.com, a non-DIY site and the ultimate Source for HVAC Information & Knowledge Sharing for the industry professional! Here you can join over 150,000 HVAC Professionals & enthusiasts from around the world discussing all things related to HVAC/R. You are currently viewing as a NON-REGISTERED guest which gives you limited access to view discussions

To gain full access to our forums you must register; for a free account. As a registered Guest you will be able to:

Participate in over 40 different forums and search/browse from nearly 3 million posts.

Union Bosses Drive Away Another 325,000 Members

Organized labor's 2006 membership numbers have been published, and they don't look good for union bosses whose salaries depend on forced dues from unionized employees. On January 25 the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the number of Americans who are members of unions shrank by 325,000.

The percentage of private-sector employees in unions dropped to 7.4% a rate unseen in almost a century. Meanwhile, more than a third 36.2%, to be precise of government employees are unionized, although even that figure is down 0.3% from the previous year.

Blaming the decline on supposed employer intimidation, union leaders are desperately rallying their favored politicians around the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). If it became law, this bill would likely increase the dues money flowing into union coffers -- by removing employees' best defense against intimidation by unions and employers alike. Under current law, employees considering unionization are entitled to a secret ballot election to decide the question. Under the EFCA, however, elections would be replaced with "card check," a process under which employees receive no secret ballots but must instead indicate their preferences openly to union organizers and employers.

Organized labor's 2006 membership numbers have been published, and they don't look good for union bosses whose salaries depend on forced dues from unionized employees. On January 25 the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the number of Americans who are members of unions shrank by 325,000.

The percentage of private-sector employees in unions dropped to 7.4% a rate unseen in almost a century. Meanwhile, more than a third 36.2%, to be precise of government employees are unionized, although even that figure is down 0.3% from the previous year.

Blaming the decline on supposed employer intimidation, union leaders are desperately rallying their favored politicians around the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). If it became law, this bill would likely increase the dues money flowing into union coffers -- by removing employees' best defense against intimidation by unions and employers alike. Under current law, employees considering unionization are entitled to a secret ballot election to decide the question. Under the EFCA, however, elections would be replaced with "card check," a process under which employees receive no secret ballots but must instead indicate their preferences openly to union organizers and employers.

looks like Tony Soprano is in big trouble.

If YOU are unhappy as a union worker,withdraw and find the relief you obviously seek, in some other position.

Organized labor's 2006 membership numbers have been published, and they don't look good for union bosses whose salaries depend on forced dues from unionized employees. On January 25 the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the number of Americans who are members of unions shrank by 325,000...

I assume the owner of your company doesn't make any money on your skills. How would you propose paying them if we did not pay dues? Everyone in management at my local came out of the field to hold the office their in.Thing is that even after dues are paid it is still top scale in the industry for 99&#37; of the people in it.

Originally Posted by hvacpope

The percentage of private-sector employees in unions dropped to 7.4% a rate unseen in almost a century. Meanwhile, more than a third 36.2%, to be precise of government employees are unionized, although even that figure is down 0.3% from the previous year. ..

Does this mean things are better or worse ? I would say worse for the American worker ,but still not too bad considering the leadership in congress and in the white house the last six years

Originally Posted by hvacpope

Blaming the decline on supposed employer intimidation, union leaders are desperately rallying their favored politicians around the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). If it became law, this bill would likely increase the dues money flowing into union coffers --<b>by increasing the number of good union jobs</b>
..

I agree

Originally Posted by hvacpope

Under current law, employees considering unionization are entitled to a secret ballot election to decide the question. Under the EFCA, however, elections would be replaced with "card check," a process under which employees receive no secret ballots but must instead indicate their preferences openly to union organizers and employers.

looks like Tony Soprano is in big trouble.

Unions will let you vote however you want to ,why do you think they would care if it was secret or not, I assure you they prefer it to be a secret ballot.
It would probably do more harm than good and I don't think it would be used in a trade union,, in fact if they were as crooked as you think they are, then open ballot would be the last thing they want.

Preston,
I’m not affiliated to labor unions, as a matter of fact I despise them got nothing against the workers just the whole unions concepts and politics are the parts that’s sort of ticked me off.
Unions in general are bad for our country; they are like cancer wont kill you it drives you out of business.
Here in NY we pay such high taxes because of the government services employees, the teachers, the firefighter,the police and the many others unions were given green light to openly steal tons of taxpayers dollars every year.

Unions are not better than welfare and union bosses and workers are the recipients, at the end we taxpayers pick the tab.
Unions put us at economical disadvantage with the rest of the world, classic examples are the auto and the airline industries once vibrant now dying breeds, if it wasn’t because taxpayers subsidies and a hand full of crooks in Washington, most unions would had been like the dinosaurs long gone instead we loose good American jobs because of them.
You are entitle to your opinion and since you are benefiting big time from such corrupts organizations I don’t expect you to change of even attempt to comprehend my points of view.

Unions could be blamed for driving many companies to build plants overseas. After all, how can co.'s afford to pay the exorbitantly high wages of its workers & keep their prices competitive?

They can't when they have to compete against the slave labor rates foreign employers can pay and by allowing our companies to freely trade it's killed our labor rates in this country. People *****ing about unions are either in a fat company position or are too stupid to realise that without a union it's like going to court without a lawyer. The laws have handcuffed unions making them ineffective anymore. Just realise if it wasn't for unions you'd have very few labor laws and really get bent over the barrell.

If everything was always done "by the book"....the book would never change.

A pretty ambiguos statement there. Even raising the minimum wage which is below poverty levels will drive the companies overseas.

Lets look at the overall picture, unions in the north did play a part in moving companies to less expensive non union labor pools down in the south. NAFTA drove the non union companies in the south down into Mexico. China and the other cheap labor countries have started drawing the Mexican companies over there due to their massive labor pools and nearly free wages. Not to mention no kind of benefits, IE: less employee cost.

Lets face it, the CEO's drawing huge bonuses for turning a proffit and driving their stock prices up could care less about where they manufacture the product. Cheap drives the bottom line higher, we see it continualy in our field, cheapest price gets the job. Same goes for large businesses. JMHO

Originally Posted by Special Ed

Unions could be blamed for driving many companies to build plants overseas. After all, how can co.'s afford to pay the exorbitantly high wages of its workers & keep their prices competitive?

I don't get a large pay from the union, I am in a union they don't pay me to be in it. My employer pays my wages just as your does you. The difference is that I have representation. You don't , unless of course you are counting yourself. Why so anti-union Pope? As far manufacturing jobs going overseas well, thats where they are going simple manufacturing in the USA is a thing of the past , unless shipping costs are a detriment,

we are talking about service and construction trades, that can hardly be shipped out. Why shouldn't service guys and construction guys form unions ? they would be stupid not to, face it take two equal techs one non union and one union, the union guy will make a lot more over his career than the other guy for no other reason than he joined the union, be stupid not to do it. Not to mention that for the most part the union guy will have a lot more opportunity to learn more and work on more interesting things than the non union guy. I figure if a guy ain't smart enough to know that the union is where he should be then why bother hiring him.

The first job I got out of trade school was with a union contractor. I was promised to be put into the apprentice program along with all the benefits.
When the service managers brother in law lost his job at the meatpacking plant, I was let go after they said " the work has slowed down and we have to let you go" but they were going to keep the guy working with the connections even though he had no idea what was going on. This was 25 years ago , I tried several more times to get in but was always met with "who do you know" rather than what do you know. So I took a different direction and made it work. I would have made a good union member but was denied the chance to do so, there is no doubt that union membership has alot of positives both finacial an educational but alot of times for a person off the street the chance is not there. Today I am gratefull to the company that I have worked for the last 25 years, I now have alot more opportunities that I might not have had if I had gone the other direction.

Lazy Unions

Unions at one time were needed. Now, they are mostly corrupt and protect the lazy. The UAW's outrageous demands have bought the big three automakers to the brink of collapse.

Incredibly high wages, no co-pays on anything, a 10,000 strong "jobs bank" where idled workers show up to a community center and play video games or whatever and collect 95% of their pay! You cannot even put these jobs bankers to work in the community doing volunteer work for the needy because it is not in the contract. Simply insaine.

How can any company compete with this albatross around thier necks?

It is not a wonder that any of the new auto plants built in the U.S. are built in right to work states in the south where you are not forced to join the union. They cannot even organize in plants in the south because people see that a unions are bad news for jobs and job creation in general.

You should have the choice to join a Union or not. It should not be a condition of employment.

Unions at one time were needed. Now, they are mostly corrupt and protect the lazy. The UAW's outrageous demands have bought the big three automakers to the brink of collapse.

Really? You do realise that the "big three" was the other signature on the union contract don't you? They agreed to the terms.

Incredibly high wages, no co-pays on anything, a 10,000 strong "jobs bank" where idled workers show up to a community center and play video games or whatever and collect 95% of their pay! You cannot even put these jobs bankers to work in the community doing volunteer work for the needy because it is not in the contract. Simply insaine.

You'd rather have unemployment compensation supporting them?Why the hell would you force someone to do volunteer work if they're "laid off"?they should be looking for a job. Now welfare should have volunteer work IMO.

How can any company compete with this albatross around thier necks?

Obviously they did for many years until they failed to progress with their technology, and granted massive buyouts and pardons to failed CEO's(non-union btw)

It is not a wonder that any of the new auto plants built in the U.S. are built in right to work states in the south where you are not forced to join the union. They cannot even organize in plants in the south because people see that a unions are bad news for jobs and job creation in general.

See my previous post of "not smart enough". The south was brainwashed for generations to hate unions,ever since THE UNION kicked their a$$ in the 1800's

You should have the choice to join a Union or not. It should not be a condition of employment.I agree.

The laws in the right to work states make unions powerless, and this isn't right either. Should be on middle ground.

If everything was always done "by the book"....the book would never change.

labor unions are not better than welfare recipients

States Weighed Down by High-Maintenance Unions

The numbers keep piling up. As states assess the amount of money they owe to (highly unionized) retiring government employees in the forms of pensions and health benefits, more and more taxpayers are learning the price of collective bargaining.

The Associated Press reported on January 30 that Wisconsin's state and local governments may owe as much as $17.4 billion in unfunded obligations to retiring and retired state employees.
In Connecticut, the Hartford Courant reported on February 6, the state teachers' retirement system is $6.9 billion in the hole -- on top of $7.9 billion in unfunded obligations to the state employees' pension system and $21.1 billion owed to fund retirees' health benefits. None of these numbers include the money needed to plug the hole in unionized teachers' retiree health benefits -- since that number hasn't been calculated.
In California, The Bakersfield Californian reported on January 27, the unfunded pension and health benefits obligations (largely negotiated by union leaders) range somewhere between $87 and $147 billion.

I don't get a large pay from the union, I am in a union they don't pay me to be in it. My employer pays my wages just as your does you. The difference is that I have representation. You don't , unless of course you are counting yourself.

Not true. Any worker in this country can be represented in any action against mamagement. How do you figure you are more adequately represented?

Why so anti-union Pope? As far manufacturing jobs going overseas well, thats where they are going simple manufacturing in the USA is a thing of the past , unless shipping costs are a detriment,

I'm not speaking for pope, but there is a great deal of evidence that shows that unions have effectively priced the American worker out of the American market.
What incentive does management have to deal with a high priced labor force when they can pay another labor force at a fraction of the cost?
Even if you include training, management still recognizes significant savings when they deal with non-American labor.

we are talking about service and construction trades, that can hardly be shipped out. Why shouldn't service guys and construction guys form unions ? they would be stupid not to, face it take two equal techs one non union and one union, the union guy will make a lot more over his career than the other guy for no other reason than he joined the union, be stupid not to do it. Not to mention that for the most part the union guy will have a lot more opportunity to learn more and work on more interesting things than the non union guy. I figure if a guy ain't smart enough to know that the union is where he should be then why bother hiring him.

I'm assuming you are implying that experts who deal with labor forces are all stupid and those of us who would rather not be a part of a labor organization are too. I worked for unions for 10 years and I never could understand why they were so willing to sacrifice quality for quantity.
Union training is always highly touted. Not sure why.
I never received a high standard of training until I tore up my U.S Steelworkers card and got a job with a company that was free from union B.S.

If management offers a competitve wage and benefits package and treats their employees responsibly what need is there for a union?